Presumptuous Politics

Saturday, February 14, 2026

Rubio Strikes Constructive Tone but Persists in US Criticism of European Allies

Rubio Urges European Allies: 'We Belong Together'

Secretary of State Marco Rubio cast the United States as the "child of Europe" in a message of unity on Saturday, offering some reassurance as well as leveling more criticism at allies after a year of turmoil in transatlantic relations.

 Rubio was addressing the annual Munich Security Conference, where Europe's leading powers have tried to project their own independence and strength while straining to keep an alliance with the U.S. under President Donald Trump alive.

The speech delivered a degree of reassurance to European countries who fear being left in the lurch on anything from the war in Ukraine to international trade ructions in a rapidly shifting global order.

But it was short on concrete commitments and made no mention of Russia, raising questions on whether Rubio's more emollient tone than that of Vice President JD Vance at the same event a year ago would change the underlying dynamics.

"In a time of headlines heralding the end of the transatlantic era, let it be known and clear to all that this is neither our goal nor our wish, because for us Americans, our home may be in the Western Hemisphere, but we will always be a child of Europe," Rubio said.

"For the United States and Europe, we belong together," he said in a speech that drew a standing ovation at the end.

While European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said she was "very much reassured" by the speech, others struck a more cautious tone.

"I am not sure that Europeans see the announced civilisational decline, supposedly caused mainly by migration and deindustrialisation, as a core uniting interest. For most Europeans, the common interest is security," said Gabrielius Landsbergis, former foreign minister of NATO member Lithuania.

"This was not a departure from the general position of the (Trump) administration. It was simply delivered in more polite terms," he said on X.

Vance's address last year dressed down European allies, arguing that the greatest danger to Europe came from censorship and democratic backsliding rather than external threats like Russia.

While praising Europe's cultural achievements from the artist Michelangelo to the poet William Shakespeare, Rubio also touched on themes that have raised hackles, including criticism of mass migration and zealous action on climate change.

"We do not want our allies to be weak, because that makes us weaker," he said.

"For we in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West's managed decline, we do not seek to separate but to revitalize an old friendship and renew the greatest civilization in human history."

A European diplomat said there was a sense of relief that Rubio had not directly attacked Europe and used the personal story to link the two sides. But, the diplomat added, "how you deliver the message makes a difference, but on the fundamentals the message is similar to Vance."

The Munich conference of top security leaders has been dominated this year by how countries are scrambling to adjust to a year of confrontations with Trump on anything from tariffs to his threat to wrest Greenland from fellow NATO member Denmark.

Asked about Russia after his speech, Rubio said the United States would not ditch its commitment to working on a peace deal with Ukraine but that it was not clear whether Moscow was serious about achieving this.

Speaking directly after Rubio, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned on Saturday against "knee-jerk" calls for the United States to distance itself from China and said that despite some positive recent signs from the White House, some U.S. voices were undermining the relationship.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz had in his opening address on Friday called for a stronger Europe to reset ties with the U.S. in a dangerous new era of great power politics, while stressing the need for Europe to beef up its own defenses.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has similarly sought a reset in relations with Europe after Brexit, on Saturday stressed the need to bolster the UK's "hard power" and military readiness plus more defense integration with Europe.

He also hinted at further alignment with the European Union's single market - which allows goods, services, capital and people to move freely across member states - and deeper economic integration, six years after Britain left the EU.

"We are not at a crossroads today, the road ahead is straight, and it is clear we must build our hard power, because that is the currency of the age," Starmer said.

"We must be able to deter aggression, and yes, if necessary, we must be ready to fight." 


 

Democrat Lawfare Is Helping China Prosper

A federal judge’s decision last Monday to let Democratic state attorneys general depose the Trump administration officials who approved a routine merger that the U.S. intelligence community insisted was needed for national security reasons tells us just how divisive the U.S. political system has become.

 The case, which involves the merger of two telecom companies, HPE and Juniper, is being framed as just a quest for answers — as a simple transparency measure to ensure no funny business occurred from the Trump White House. In reality, it’s anything but that. It’s the latest episode of selective outrage — another instance where normal, routine governance becomes “lawfare” the moment the Trump administration issues a press release.

When the suit to stop the HPE-Juniper merger first landed, Letitia James, Keith Ellison, and the rest of the Democratic attorneys general sat it out. They refused to sign onto the Justice Department’s suit.

Only after the Trump administration reviewed the facts, weighed the national security implications, and backed a settlement allowing the merger to proceed did they rush in and cry Trump cronyism.

This proves that they aren’t really fighting a merger; they are fighting Trump.

Which is a shame because this merger was a strategic response to a genuine national security challenge.

The United States is in a global technology competition with China, and telecommunications infrastructure is one of the main battlefields.


 


READ MORE: Trump’s China Strategy Is Working - Here’s the Proof

Cuba's Economy Grinds to a Halt As Russia and China Make Noises About Helping, but Fear Offending Trump


Huawei, Beijing’s crown jewel in telecom, has been widely recognized as a national security threat. Congress has effectively banned it from U.S. networks. The Department of Defense has designated Huawei a Chinese military company. U.S. allies have restricted it for fear of state subsidies, coercive market practices, and the risk of built-in surveillance.

China’s goal is to dominate the global telecom standards and infrastructure and make the world dependent on its services, so it can control the backbone of the 5G and AI-enabled future.

We can’t let this happen, and the idea that the United States should hobble its own companies in the name of abstract antitrust theory is absolutely ridiculous.

That’s why the Trump DOJ moved to greenlight the HPE–Juniper challenge and allow the merger to go forward under a settlement. According to reporting, senior figures in the U.S. intelligence community personally communicated to DOJ how important the deal was from a national security standpoint. When intelligence professionals who spend their careers assessing foreign threats say a merger strengthens America’s competitive position against China, that should matter.

Yet now Democrats are shouting “corruption,” alleging “Trump backroom dealmaking” and claiming the administration is “open for business for the highest bidder.” Give me a break. The same people who spent years insisting we must “listen to the experts” are suddenly deaf when the intelligence experts draw conclusions that help their leading political opponent (President Trump).

This whiplash reveals a deeper hypocrisy that has come to define the post-Trump Democratic Party.

Before Trump, intelligence agencies were treated as sacrosanct. Their assessments were beyond partisan dispute. After Trump - when intelligence officials say a merger advances national security - Democrats shrug and change the subject.

Before Trump, Democrats talked tough on China - about issues as unfair trade, industrial espionage, and the need to defend American technological leadership. After Trump, any policy that confronts the Communist regime in Beijing, is rebranded as xenophobia or fearmongering - especially if it might benefit U.S. industry.

Before Trump, Democrats argued for controlled immigration to protect American workers and wages. After Trump, every attempt to enforce borders or prioritize domestic labor is smeared as bigotry.

This pattern is not about policy but about posture. Everything Trump touches must be suspect, even when it aligns with long-standing bipartisan goals like countering Chinese state capitalism and protecting critical infrastructure.

According to Democrats, if a decision benefits Trump politically, it must be investigated, litigated, and delegitimized, no matter how strong the substantive case.

Talk about reckless.

America cannot afford these political games. We are competing with a strategic adversary that coordinates state power, capital, and industry without apology. We need to take them head on, not cower because of Democratic outrage.

Democratic AGs, pretending this deal was about corruption-after sitting on the sidelines until Trump backed the deal-only confirms what many Americans already suspect: for some on the left, the real crime to The Left is allowing Trump to be right.

Col. Robert L. Maness (Ret), host of The Rob Maness Show on X, is a 32-year United States Air Force combat veteran, where he served as commander of the 377th Air Base Wing, Kirtland Air Force Base. He was a member of the Trump Campaign’s Veterans and Military Families for Trump Coalition. Follow him on X @RobManess.


Virginia Supreme Court Hands Dems Huge Win, Allows Outrageous Gerrymander to Move Forward

Democrat-led gerrymandering lives to see another day in the Old Dominion after the Supreme Court of Virginia (SCOVA) ruled Friday that a redistricting referendum can proceed on April 21.

 

Republicans had argued that the referendum should be paused following a lower court ruling that found Democrats had "failed to follow their own rules for adding the redistricting amendment to a special session; failed to approve the amendment before the public began voting in last year’s general election; and failed to publish the amendment three months before the election, as required by law."

 The Supreme Court of Virginia has taken over the redistricting amendment case — and refused to stop the April 21 referendum.

The Court denied the motions to stay, meaning the constitutional amendment vote will go forward before the Court decides the merits.

In short: Virginians… pic.twitter.com/qZmsG5Itvg

— Tim Anderson (@AssocAnderson) February 13, 2026

The Supreme Court of Virginia has taken over the redistricting amendment case — and refused to stop the April 21 referendum.

The Court denied the motions to stay, meaning the constitutional amendment vote will go forward before the Court decides the merits.

In short: Virginians will vote first. The Supreme Court will rule later.

Or for a bunch of fancy legal words: this sucks.

As RedState has previously reported, the referendum in question seeks to replace an existing amendment to the state constitution that gives authority to redraw congressional boundaries to a redistricting committee – this amendment was approved by Virginians in 2020 – with an amendment that gives that power, instead, to lawmakers. Democrats control both houses of the General Assembly, so that essentially means the amendment would empower them to set the congressional map. 


READ MORE: (Updated) Virginia Democrats Just Engineered the Most Extreme Gerrymander in the Country

Democrats Are One Step Closer to Nuking Most of Virginia's GOP Congressional Seats


To get here, Democrats defied a state law that requires proposed amendments be published at least three months before an election. They, instead, published it mere days before the November 2025 election; they are now seeking to redefine that law and make it retroactive to all the way back to 1971, when the law was first passed.

Democrats released their gerrymandered map last week. Their proposed map, which they will adopt if the April referendum is approved by voters, will eliminate most of the congressional seats currently held by Republicans. The 6-5 split that currently favors Democrats would turn into a 10-1 split that would neuter the GOP and disenfranchise large swaths of voters in the red parts of the commonwealth.

Democrat leaders, needless to say, are thrilled with SCOVA's ruling and are taking a victory lap.

“Today the Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed what we already know, Virginians will have the final say,” Speaker Don Scott just said in a statement to me. “The redistricting referendum on April 21 will move forward."

The commonwealth's new governor is also reported to be "happy" over the development.

I asked @GovernorVA if she was happy that the referendum was moving forward.

"I am focused on having clarity for us to be able to communicate to people. It's not necessarily an emotional issue for me. It's a question of whether voters know when and how they can make their… https://t.co/QqMarYgRyC

— Tyler Englander (@TylerEnglander) February 13, 2026

I asked @GovernorVA if she was happy that the referendum was moving forward. 

"I am focused on having clarity for us to be able to communicate to people. It's not necessarily an emotional issue for me. It's a question of whether voters know when and how they can make their voices heard," Governor Spanberger said.

There is a silver lining in SCOVA's ruling: they have indicated they will decide the merits of the lower court ruling after the referendum takes place.


Trump Indicates That One Hero From the Maduro Raid Will Receive the Medal of Honor

Trump Indicates That One Hero From the Maduro Raid Will Receive the Medal of Honor

President Donald Trump has suggested that one of the American service members who took part in the daring raid to capture former Venezuelan head-of-state Nicolas Maduro would be receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor for their heroics during the operation.

 ðŸš¨ BREAKING: President Trump just revealed one of the American heroes who helped capture Maduro in Venezuela will be awarded the Congressional MEDAL OF HONOR

“These are great warriors. These are great Patriots!”

MUCH DESERVED! 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/plW4glHCIE

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 13, 2026

The raid was wildly successful, with no losses to American life or equipment. Trump has largely credited the strength of the American military and a device he has dubbed the “discombobulator” for the ease of the victory against Venezuelan forces.

🇺🇸 Trump is visiting the Delta Force HQ in Fort Bragg, NC to thank their service in the operation Absolute Resolve

"The Russian equipment didn't work, the Chinese equipment didn't work"

"Everyone is trying to figure out why? Someday they will find out" pic.twitter.com/yFgxSlygcb

— 🇻🇪 Venezuela Insider 🇻🇪 (@Andresevd) February 13, 2026

Trump made the announcement while visiting Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where he met and spoke with the troops who carried out Operation Absolute Resolve, making jokes and partaking in his now-iconic Trump dance to an amused crowd. Trump also made sure to celebrate the reversal of the Biden-era decision to change the name of Fort Bragg to ‘Fort Liberty.”

.@FLOTUS at Fort Bragg: "It is my distinct honor to introduce your Commander-in-Chief — our leader who maintains a mission of Peace Through Strength — President Donald J. Trump." 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/jcEm4I8Jj3

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 13, 2026

.@POTUS at Fort Bragg: "My message to all of the warriors here today is that your Commander-in-Chief supports you totally... We're going to continue to make our country bigger and better and stronger than ever before, and that's exactly where we are right now." pic.twitter.com/1L6bhfJWpo

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 13, 2026

TRUMP DANCE AT FORT BRAGG 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/18Ikpz3uvr

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 13, 2026

HILARIOUS: President Trump: “We're also purchasing 30 new and modified Abrams tanks. Still the best tank, right? It was named in honor of Stacey Abrams.”

*Crowd Laughs*

“Congratulations, thank you very much for a great name, Stacey.” pic.twitter.com/6kvgDymKqE

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) February 13, 2026

"Let me begin by saying a very, very big 'Thank you' to our GREAT WARRIORS and the men and women of the U.S. Army." - President Donald J. Trump at Fort Bragg 🇺🇸pic.twitter.com/8HP8qn7t64

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 13, 2026

🚨 BREAKING: ABSOLUTE MADNESS at Fort Bragg!

A literal SEA of U.S. troops just ERUPTED when First Lady Melania brought President Trump on stage!

Roaring cheers, hats in the air, pure love for their Commander-in-Chief.
pic.twitter.com/phPMfZkSKv

— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) February 13, 2026

🚨 WOW! Military families at Fort Bragg are ecstatic as President Trump and First Lady Melania PERSONALLY greet them while YMCA is blasting

No wonder morale is at an all-time high! 🔥pic.twitter.com/Tiw1q1HyHK

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 13, 2026

 

GOP Secures Votes Needed to Pass the SAVE Act

GOP Secures Votes Needed to Pass the SAVE Act

Senate Republicans have secured the needed votes to pass the SAVE Act after Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) confirmed that she would sign on as a co-sponsor of the bill late Friday afternoon.

 ðŸš¨ BREAKING: SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME) is a YEA on the SAVE America Act, a HUGE victory!

We are now at 50 GUARANTEED VOTES — with JD Vance, that's enough to PASS it after a talking filibuster!

Collins was previously unsure.

THIS IS MASSIVE! Get it done, save the republic! pic.twitter.com/At96Ieqk9i

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 13, 2026

With that, Republicans have reached 50 votes, with Vice President JD Vance serving as the tie-breaking 51st vote to pass the bill. The ordeal is not yet over, however. Republican leadership would still need to bring the bill forward, voting Democrats to utilize a “standing” filibuster rather than the more typical “silent” filibuster used when a measure has fewer than the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture.

What’s next now that we have enough votes to pass the motion to proceed to the House-passed SAVE America Act?

In a nutshell, we now need to convince Senate Republicans to ditch the Zombie Filibuster & enforce the Talking Filibuster on this bill! https://t.co/WsNZfFJUrQ pic.twitter.com/TOiT3gYYuB

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) February 13, 2026

Conservative Republicans have strongly advocated for leadership to pursue this path, as they see it as the only way forward for advancing President Trump’s agenda, with Democrats being unwilling to be reasonable in negotiations.

The SAVE Act was recently passed in the House 218-213 with bipartisan support, with Democrat Henry Cuellar being the lone Democrat to vote in favor of the bill. The vast majority of the electorate supports the contents of the SAVE Act, but Democrats almost unanimously rejected the GOP’s effort to enhance election integrity.

You know how badly the Democrats are panicking when they bring out Obama to spread lies about voter ID.

The fact is that nearly 90% of voters support:

✅Requiring government-issued photo ID to vote.

✅Requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote for the first time. https://t.co/qcWZdTGoTD pic.twitter.com/ibLI94rIw5

— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) February 12, 2026

Passing the SAVE Act remains Republicans’ top priority ahead of the midterm elections.


 

DOJ ousts judge-appointed U.S. Attorney hours after swearing-in, as Blanche declares ‘Judges don't pick U.S. Attorneys, POTUS does’

No photo description available.

In a dramatic escalation of the power struggle between the White House and the federal judiciary, the Department of Justice (DOJ) fired a newly appointed U.S. attorney on Wednesday, just five hours after he was selected by a panel of federal judges.

 The appointee, Donald T. Kinsella, a 79-year-old litigator and former federal prosecutor, was named by judges of the Northern District of New York to lead the office in an interim capacity.

Kinsella’s tenure began and ended on Wednesday. After a private swearing-in ceremony in Albany, the White House responded with a swift dismissal delivered via email.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche also later confirmed the firing in a blunt post on social media.

 

“Judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does,” Blanche wrote. “See Article II of our Constitution. You are fired, Donald Kinsella.”

The move reflects the Trump administration’s defense of the Constitution’s separation of powers, asserting that executive authority rests with the president — not the judiciary — and that only the elected U.S. Commander-in-Chief can hire or remove officials enforcing federal law.

The judges in Albany acted under a rarely invoked federal statute (28 U.S.C. § 546(d)), which they argue empowers district courts to appoint a U.S. attorney to fill a vacancy if an interim appointment by the attorney general expires without a Senate-confirmed successor.

 

The vacancy arose after John A. Sarcone III, a former campaign attorney, was disqualified by a court in January. Judge Lorna Schofield ruled that Sarcone had been “serving unlawfully” for months after the administration allegedly used “procedural maneuvers” to bypass the 120-day limit on interim appointments.

Before his disqualification, Sarcone had been leading an investigation into New York Attorney General Letitia James, a prominent critic of President Trump. In October 2025, James was indicted on federal charges by a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia.

The standoff in New York is not an isolated incident, as the GOP administration has faced similar judicial rebukes in other “progressive” districts as well.

 

In the Eastern District of Virginia, a judge recently tossed out indictments brought by Lindsey Halligan, a Trump-approved interim prosecutor, after ruling her appointment “invalid.” In New Jersey, courts also blocked the appointment of Alina Habba, a former personal lawyer for the president.

While the law allows judges to appoint in a vacancy, Article II of the Constitution does in fact grant the president the power to remove executive officers.

What Happens Next

 

The judges of the Northern District of New York released a brief statement thanking Kinsella for his “willingness to return to public service,” but they have not yet announced if they will attempt to name another replacement.

Sources say the DOJ is expected to reassign Sarcone under a different designation or name a new interim prosecutor more closely aligned with the administration’s policy priorities — an approach that could ultimately prompt a Supreme Court review.


 

Watergate Files Reveal Deep State Secrets: Time for Truth

YouTube video player

The recent unsealing of old Watergate-era files, combined with the Trump administration’s earlier mass release of JFK assassination records, has thrown more fuel on the fire for Americans who do not trust the permanent Washington bureaucracy. Officials and journalists are finally being forced to reckon with documents that show the Nixon White House and intelligence agencies operated in a fog of secrecy and influence that too often served elite interests over the nation’s.

 Veteran political operative Roger Stone has publicly connected the dots in blunt terms, arguing these newly surfaced records underscore a long-standing deep state alliance between the CIA and elements inside the Justice Department and political class. Stone told Newsmax that while not every paper changes his conclusions, the pattern of motive, means, and opportunity around figures like Lyndon Johnson and intelligence operatives deserves renewed scrutiny rather than reflexive dismissal.

Among the most consequential disclosures are Watergate-era entries showing President Nixon’s own contingency planning and rare sworn testimony, which reveal how tight the links were between the executive, covert operations, and global Cold War maneuvers. Those files even include Nixon’s rare, candid grand jury statements and internal memoranda that cast new light on how national-security claims were used to keep uncomfortable facts hidden from the American people.

The CIA connection is not theoretical — archival FOIA records demonstrate that operatives and technicians later implicated in Watergate had documented ties to agency programs and capabilities, raising obvious questions about institutional overlap and accountability. Longstanding anomalies, such as celebrated agency technicians later convicted or involved in political break-ins, now sit squarely in the public record and demand explanation from agencies that once claimed minimal involvement.

Conservatives should not reflexively cheer conspiracy theories, but neither should we allow intelligence agencies and a pliant political establishment to hide behind decades of convenient silence. If the documents suggest that national-security rhetoric was repeatedly used to cover political shenanigans, then transparency, oversight, and consequences are not radical notions — they are the very guardrails of a constitutional republic.

This moment is a test: will Washington double down on secrecy and self-protection, or will lawmakers and the public demand real reforms to prevent intelligence powers from being misapplied for partisan ends? The right answer is clear — full declassification where possible, congressional investigations with real teeth, and prosecutions when laws were broken, regardless of party or rank.

Patriots who love this country must press for truth, not tribal silence. These files are a reminder that liberty depends on an informed citizenry and institutions that answer to the people, not to hidden networks of insiders who think themselves above the law.

 

Democrats' Shutdown Gamble Threatens TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard

YouTube video player

On Friday’s Finnerty, guest host E.D. Hill tore into Democrats for their role in bringing the nation perilously close to another avoidable shutdown, calling the episode the kind of hypocrisy hardworking Americans know all too well. Hill reminded viewers that while Democrats lecture about responsibility and compassion, their political posturing now threatens TSA, FEMA, and Coast Guard operations that protect our families and communities.

 The immediate cause of the crisis is painfully simple: funding for the Department of Homeland Security was allowed to lapse as Senate negotiations stalled, setting a deadline at midnight into the weekend that could trigger partial agency shutdowns on Feb. 14, 2026. This isn’t abstract Washington theater — it’s a concrete threat to the security and safety of everyday Americans who rely on federal services for disaster response and airport security.

Democrats justified their blockade by demanding sweeping changes to immigration enforcement and oversight of ICE and CBP, insisting they won’t vote for a bill they say lacks reforms. But conservatives see the calculation as raw politics: weaponize outrage over border enforcement to score headlines while holding essential services hostage. That cynical choice — putting ideological grandstanding ahead of national safety — is exactly what Hill slammed on air.

Congressional dysfunction made worse by partisan theater has real costs: TSA officers and other frontline workers risk being forced to work without pay, and FEMA’s ability to respond to emergencies could be diminished just when Americans need help the most. The consequences fall on ordinary taxpayers and first responders, not on career politicians who hide behind press releases while the lights on critical programs flicker.

Republicans in the House moved repeatedly to fund the government, but the standoff in the Senate and Democratic refusals to compromise left a path to a shutdown wide open. If Democrats truly cared about the people they claim to represent, they’d stop grandstanding and join a responsible funding solution instead of scoring political points at the expense of national security. E.D. Hill’s blunt assessment on Finnerty echoed the frustration felt by millions who are tired of Washington’s games.

Now is the moment for Americans to put pressure on their senators and representatives to end the brinkmanship and pass clean, pragmatic funding that keeps DHS and critical agencies functioning. Patriotism means stewardship — not theatrical self-righteousness — and the men and women who keep our airports, borders, and disaster-response teams running deserve leaders who will do the simple job of funding the government on time.


Friday, February 13, 2026

CartoonDems


 








Trump's EPA Rolls Back Major Climate Change Rule

Trump angered environmentalists from the get-go (2019)

The Trump administration on Thursday announced the repeal of a scientific finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, removing the legal basis for federal climate regulations.

 It also ended subsequent federal greenhouse gas emission standards for all vehicles and engines of model years 2012 to 2027.

The move represents the most sweeping climate change policy rollback by the administration to date, after a string of regulatory cuts and other moves intended to unfetter fossil fuel development and stymie the rollout of clean energy.

"Under the process just completed by the EPA, we are officially terminating the so-called endangerment finding, a disastrous Obama-era policy that severely damaged the American auto industry and drove up prices for American consumers," Trump said, announcing the repeal beside EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and White House Budget director Russ Vought, who has long sought to revoke the finding.

Trump has said he believes manmade climate change is a hoax and has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Agreement, as well as ending Biden administration-era tax credits aimed at accelerating deployment of electric cars and renewable energy.

The endangerment finding was first adopted by the Obama administration in 2009 and led the EPA to take action under the Clean Air Act of 1963 to curb emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and four other heat-trapping air pollutants from vehicles, power plants and other industries.

Its repeal would remove the regulatory requirements to measure, report, certify, and comply with federal greenhouse gas emission standards for cars, but might not initially apply to stationary sources such as power plants.

The transportation and power sectors are each responsible for about a quarter of U.S. greenhouse gas output, according to EPA figures.

The EPA said the repeal will save U.S. taxpayers $1.3 trillion, eliminating the endangerment finding and all federal greenhouse gas emission standards for vehicles.

Although many industry groups back the repeal of stringent vehicle emission standards, they have been reluctant to show public support for rescinding the endangerment finding because of the legal and regulatory uncertainty it could unleash.

Legal experts said the policy reversal could, for example, lead to a surge in lawsuits known as "public nuisance" actions, a pathway that had been blocked following a 2011 Supreme Court ruling that greenhouse gas regulation should be left in the hands of the EPA instead of the courts.

Environmental groups have slammed the proposed repeal as a danger to the climate. Future U.S. administrations seeking to regulate greenhouse gas emissions likely would need to reinstate the endangerment finding, a task that could be politically and legally complex.

The Environmental Defense Fund said that the repeal will end up costing Americans more, despite EPA's statement that climate regulations have driven up costs for consumers.

"Administrator Lee Zeldin has directed EPA to stop protecting the American people from the pollution that's causing worse storms, floods, and skyrocketing insurance costs," said EDF President Fred Krupp. "This action will only lead to more of this pollution, and that will lead to higher costs and real harms for American families."


 

CartoonDems